[Tagging] Vote / Opinion poll about history=event

[John Smith]

On 6 May 2011 00:59, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> In fact the only thing that will be accomplished by removing
>> references on the wiki is people will use multiple key/value pairs for
>> the same type of object because they can't see any other values that are
>> already documented.
>>
>
> Between the two extremes, completely removing or putting the controversed
> tag 'event' prominent in the Map Features (where the feedback shows that the
> tag is far away from a consensus), I tried something new with this

So far one person has gamed the vote, hardly convincing, especially
since they wish to do away with historic=battlefield as well, of which
there is 317 tagged objects, and based on a quick glance a large
variety of people using that tag in the 3-4 years of it being
approved.

> considered as a "map feature". This is a lot of efforts to find a compromise
> to satisfy everyone.

Already some think what can be mapped should be limited and enforced
on the wiki, but it won't limit anything, it will just make a mess of
things in terms of the same type of object being tagged in many
different ways.

> You will find anyway in the database much much more undocumented tags than
> documented tags. So keep the Map Features page for what it has been created.

So that is a reason to remove documented features that would be useful
for others wanting to tag the same thing?

Already someone else has used it as well.